I am curious about the Vienna project. Have you heard any news, delays, or cost over runs? I walk by there every morning, and a few things have me worried.

I'm not construction expert, but it would seem to me that when you pour concrete roads and sidewalks, its kind of expensive to tear it all up and re-pour.

I have witnessed several such events. They poured concrete side walks by south garage, even put in the mounts for the lights and started putting in the bus shelters.

Then I noticed yesterday, that they had to jack hammer around all of the light pole fixtures. Not sure, but they were jack hammering dangerously close to the brand new shiny bus shelters. Not sure if any were damaged but wouldn't be surprised.

Also, last week they tore up the new concrete in the street, and they had to repair the garage exit stairs.

Another thing is walker safety. With the new daily traffic patterns, not enough overhead lighting and unmarked crossing lines, its a bit unsafe to navigate on foot. Do they have completion target dates for this project?

G. said the temporary bus shelters are still in use some 10 months after they were moved.

Wednesday, December 19, 2012

My bus the other morning (the 7W into Pentagon) got in a fender-bender out on the 395 HOV lane—as far as I can tell we rear-ended a car. It wasn't terrible—a big jolt and my neck's a bit stiff, but I didn't see any damage on the other car.

The issue is how our driver handled this.

He did not say or do anything after the accident—he simply sat there.

He didn't ask if everyone was okay, didn't tell us what had happened, didn't tell us what would happen next or how long we'd be waiting, didn't check on the driver we rear-ended.

We just sat there for 10-15 minutes in silence.

The driver also didn't move out of traffic (which was not helped by the vehicle we hit, which didn't pull up much at all). The rear of the bus was sticking way out into the right lane, forcing rush-hour traffic to go into the left lane to get around us.

I was seated at the right rear of the bus and I was directly over the edge of the lane, so the whole left side of the bus was out in traffic.

I was really disappointed by all this—I have a much higher opinion of MetroBus than MetroRail, because the bus drivers seem to be so polite, there is some customer service, and things are much more efficient and clean. It really surprised me to see something potentially serious like this handled with such nonchalance.

Tuesday, December 18, 2012

While Metro is touting its "succesful" progress by taking out full-page ads that haven't been proofread, it sounds like their Momentum "conversation" is exactly what we all thought it would be.

From Thomas:

So, yesterday I received an email from Metro's Mindmixer campaign. I had forgotten that I signed up for it when I read about it on Unsuck a few weeks back. Anyway, the email was soliciting Metro riders for ideas for future Metro improvements. The email also said something to the effect that, "with 1.2 million riders everyday, we must be doing something right!"

This humble-brag infuriated me. Of course they have 1.2 million riders everyday, many people have to take the Metro each day, several for free. It's basically a monopoly.

I took the bait. I went to the website, and spent about 60 seconds typing up the following post:

1.) Don't claim you're doing something right because you serve 1.2 million people each day. Most of us are basically forced to take this shoddy service. I only ride because it's free for me, and I still contemplate driving instead even though it would cost me over $2,000 extra each year.
2.) Maybe purchase trains that don't force crowding and have those terrible seats where you have to ask people to get up to leave. Where have you ever ridden on public trains like that?
3.) How about invest in more transportation nodes so there aren't various types of single points of failure? It's ridiculous.
4.) Stop reducing bus routes that serve areas that are Metrorail is inaccessible.
5.) Your PR person is awful. You blame passengers for accidents and don't communicate well at all. Fire whoever is responsible.
6.) Where the escalators are only 10 feet or so, just make them stairs that way people are constantly moving versus the lazy who just sit there and block people in rush hour.
7.) Turn on some lights in the dark Metro stations. It's hard to read.
8.) If I enter a station, see that there's a 15-minute wait and decide to leave and walk, STOP CHARGING ME. I DIDN'T RIDE A TRAIN. I HATE YOU FOR DOING THIS. IT SHOULD BE ILLEGAL.
9.) Make it so the bus drivers actually charge everyone for riding. The system is losing money, I see people ride for free every time I ride a bus. I want to pay. I want more money and more services, not a free bus ride every once in a while.
10.) Make a pedestrian tunnel between Metro Center and Gallery Place. It shouldn't be difficult and would probably help with congestion.

Sure, I could have spent some time refining a few of the points, and maybe the caps lock in #8 is not the best form (but that really does infuriate me), but I thought most of my points were actually rather reasonable. I support the idea of a good public transit system.

By the end of the night, I had a few people post responses to my post. They were all positive. One said "I couldn't agree more with all of your points."

I felt good and thought maybe there'd be an ongoing conversation about some of the easier ideas to address.

I woke up the next day, and my post was flagged for removal three times and ultimately taken down from the website.

Do you think other actual Metro riders were so taken aback by my ten points that three of them actually flagged this post for removal, or do you think staff at Mindmixer got involved because I took a shot at WMATA's PR guru? Did I offend their Omaha ways?

I guess I'll never know....

From Jacob:

In case anyone actually believes that Metro Momentum/Mindmixer was actually about WMATA listening to ideas as opposed to just being yet another high-priced PR scheme, I thought you might be interested to know that I responded to their Thanksgiving "What are you thankful for" thing by saying "I'm thankful for independent news sources like Unsuck DC Metro which actually report on WMATA's myriad failings instead of credulously republishing press releases" and was promptly banned from the site for "inappropriate behavior" in form of posting "obscene, hateful, or derogatory" content.

Friday, December 14, 2012

That's when the Washington Post, through its Washington Post Live PR brand, is hosting a "media event" called "Conquering the Commute," and, ironically, the horribly named event is sponsored by Metro!

Also sponsoring is the American Public Transportation Association, a
lobby group, and the Greater Washington Board of Trade, a regional
business association.

The event ostensibly "will gather experts, to discuss how transportation updates and investments are crucial to the health of the region and to highlight the latest in smart improvements that create jobs and keep DC-area commuting efficient."

The speakers appear to offer a predictable, monotone selection of views.

To have Metro, one of the dumbest organizations in the region, sponsor an event on "smart improvements" is risible. Watching Metro, the same transit system that's cutting service, team up with the dying Washington Post is just kinda sad.

But it doesn't stop there. Two members of the Post's objective editorial staff are scheduled to be moderators. They are Robert McCartney, a local columnist, and Dr. Gridlock, who allegedly covers Metro objectively.

I wrote McCartney, who wrote about this blog some years ago, asking if he thought there was any conflict for Post editorial staff to participate in a Metro-funded event.

He referred all questions to Mary Jordan, the Post's editor for conferences and special reports, the mastermind of the Post Live events.
She did not respond.

Another Washington Post event organizer said the following in an email:

I'd like to first give you some context about how these events work. This sponsorship follows all of our conference guidelines. We have multiple sponsors for this event, this discussion covers additional transit topics other than Metro, no one from WMATA is on any of the panels, and they do not have any say in the content of the event. As to your question about how much WMATA paid, as a general rule, we never discuss how much sponsors and advertisers pay.

It seems like there are a few distinct concerns from a journalistic point of
view. Who is sponsoring the event? Do the invited speakers represent the full
spectrum of points of view on the issue? And does the event sponsorship raise
concerns about who is invited, and who isn't? It would certainly be easier for the paper to maintain its independence if it
chose to steer clear of convening public forums sponsored by industry or
government groups that have a clear stake in the policies being discussed.

I wonder if the Post--and commuters of all kinds--would be better served if the Post attempted to reassert itself as an area watchdog and produced good, hard-hitting news about Metro, for example, instead of participating in what is basically a money making PR stunt paid for, in part, by Metro.

Maybe the coziness between Metro and the Washington Post is something that just bothers me, but I wanted to make sure it was noted.

Thursday, December 13, 2012

To me, Metro's future looks worse than I'd ever thought, as promised service levels from 2006 to 2011 don't appear to have materialized and labor costs continue to balloon, according to data from the National Transit Database (NTD).

The below chart paints a very ugly picture, showing just how
much promised rail service appears to have never happened, despite Metro
doing everything possible to make it look otherwise.

Transit agencies like Metro are required by law to report certain performance statistics to the NTD. According to the website, the stats are used divvy up some $5 billion in Federal Transit Administration funds among the nation's transit agencies.

The "revenue mile" referenced equals one mile traveled by a vehicle, in this case a rail car, with paying passengers on board.

In the chart, the red line shows the number of revenue miles Metro said they would provide (and presumably were funded for) from 2006 to 2013. The numbers can be found in the approved budgets. It shows, as you can see, a steady increase in proposed service--on paper.

However, the chart's blue line is the number of revenue miles Metro reported to the NTD as actually having been delivered. The gaps between projected and reported have grown, sometimes dramatically, yet Metro keeps giving a rosy outlook year after year.

In 2011, for example, Metro budgeted for 81,569,545 revenue miles when it reported to the NTD that it only ran 67,234,252 revenue miles. That's an almost 18 percent difference. One could look at it like an 18 percent cut in promised service.

Perhaps the loss of revenue miles is due to all the track work, but if that were the case, why does Metro continue to raise the estimates in its budget documents?

I wonder how the jurisdictions feel about funding a service Metro appears to not be providing. I know how riders feel when the fares go up and the service doesn't improve.

2009, the year of the deadly Red Line crash, is an inflection point for both budgeted and reported revenue miles, but the reported miles nosedived while Metro's promised service remained flat for the year.

Suddenly, reports of ridership dropping by five percent recently look pretty good considering what looks like an 18 percent cut in service.

Meanwhile, labor costs (salaries, wages and benefits), Metro's biggest expense, rose a whopping 30 percent (19 when adjusted for inflation) from 2006 to 2011. In 2006, Metro spent $831,667,228, and in 2011, it spent $1,082,683,205, according to the NTD data.

It should be noted that the NTD has quite a big caveat on its data, but if they're basing funding on it, it can't be that bad. Both NTD and WMATA data seem designed to be as opaque as possible.

Wednesday, December 12, 2012

I take Metro often to hockey games downtown, and while the NHL has been locked out, there was a special AHL exhibition the other evening between the Hershey Bears and the Norfolk Admirals at Verizon Center.

After the game, the exit crowd was taking the second of three refurbished units down toward the platform at Gallery Place. The escalator suddenly stopped, thankfully to design this time, but at the landing there was a misaligned jumble of stairs not unlike what we've seen in Metro incidents before. I'm thankful it was not worse.

The first stair at the comb plate was angled downward about 20 degrees
or so, so that the rear of the step was punched up at that angle - and
the second had seemed to impact lesser beyond that maybe half the
inclination - the one or two steps on the flat landing area after that
were appropriately flat and aligned.

Given that these escalators at Gallery Place were refurbished less than two years ago, I find this a frightening lapse of maintenance and yet another example of Metro incompetence with regards to escalators.

I apologize for the lack of pictures, but I wanted to get away from the machine as quickly as possible.

From Scott:

Wanted to alert you and your readers to an escalator situation at King Street station. I was on the escalator (with about 20-25 others) when the unit abruptly jolted to a halt that caused riders near the bottom end to trip over what appeared to be components of the escalator on the ground nearby.

The passengers were startled but thankfully, there were no injuries. The station manager seemed surprised as well, and immediately cordoned off the escalator.

Tuesday, December 11, 2012

I've gotten several emails, and there have been a lot of tweets about how train operators aren't giving passengers enough time to get off and on the trains. I asked a source about it, and here's what they had to say:

It's cyclical. It is due to new classes of operators that come into the system. One started a couple weeks ago.

I am sure they have it drilled into their psyche that they must maintain schedule at all costs.

Soon, reality will set in that maintaining schedule is just not as easy as it was taught to them. There is no way they could maintain that on the mainline.

Also, they think they are falling behind schedule so they will close doors
faster to try to "make up" the time they have lost due to
something that has previously screwed the line up.

They will eventually get into the rhythm that all operators get into. This keeps them from getting too far out of whack.

Friday, December 7, 2012

A very reliable Metro source calls Metro's reasoning for extending the Silver Line from Stadium Armory to Largo "total bullsh*t."

Metro gave three basic reasons why the Silver Line has to be extended rather than turning around at the D&G junction (Stadium Armory) as originally planned:

The pocket track uses #6 switches and due to an aerial construction design, #8 switches cannot be installed.

The
entire pocket track is on an aerial structure and will require a high
level of maintenance to maintain a high level of operational
performance.

The length of the pocket track is not adequate for reliable 8-car train operation.

Yesterday, during the board meeting, Metro's number two, Dave Kubicek said a failure at the D&G could be "catastrophic."

This all sounded rather strange to me, so I asked very reliable source about Metro's reasoning. Here's what the source said.

They
turn trains there all the time. They store trains there during football
games, and for large events downtown that require a lot of trains in a
short period of time to alleviate crowds. They have been doing it for 30
years. The 8-car train thing is ridiculous.

If these switches are that dangerous then why are they using them at all?

Also, did they balance the maintenance costs versus the extension cost? I haven't seen anything about that.

According to another source, before Rush"+," Metro routinely turned
Orange Line trains around at the D&G. The same source said Metro should have upgraded the switches there with guards (ostensibly to prevent
derailments) as recommended by the NTSB after a 2007 derailment.

"There are
several places Metro turns trains around that are the same length as the D&G," the source said. "They turn them around at Mt. Vernon Sq. at about the
same pace they're talking about with the Silver Line, too."

In a Washington Post article, Metro officials said "turning trains [at D&G] would require a level of precision difficult for all but the most skilled operators."

One source's reaction:

Ridiculous!

I also
thought it very ironic how just last week Sarles was bragging about the
new hires stepping up to the plate. Then, this week, the operators are
not competent enough to pull up to a signal, key down the train and go
to the opposite end, key up and go. Most people could be trained to do
that in 4 hours. It's first day operator stuff.

Here
is what this all comes down to. They do not trust the new operators. PERIOD.

The source went on to explain the mistrust stems from the fact that Silver Line operators will likely be the newest in Metro's fleet.

There are several reasons why, they said. First, they will likely have to report to West Falls Church, considered by many one of the worst places to work because it is far from where most operators live, and many hate working for the West Falls Church Division superintendent.

Furthermore, operators at West Falls are assigned "awful" days off, and the runs blocks (shifts) are "awful."

"A lot of runs start at 6 a.m., make one
round trip, and then the operator goes off duty for 4 or 5 hours only to
come back on duty around 2 p.m. and make two round trips," a source said. "No one with
any seniority would pick runs like that."

Another source said they thought the change of plans for the Silver Line was "brought about by a
lack of confidence in the equipment, even the upgraded equipment, and the people. That's why it's
going to be extended, and that's why it's going to cost more."

The extension could cost as much as $4.5 million to the operating costs of the new line, according to reports.

Thursday, December 6, 2012

During my commute last Monday morning on the D2, the bus driver was reading a newspaper for a long stretch of the route, both while the bus was stopped and while it was in motion.

I emailed WMATA about this and asked for a specific response, which I thought was reasonable given the seriousness of the safety issue (I mentioned that I'd like to provide them with the attached photos and video).

This was a westbound D2, leaving Dupont at 7:30 AM, bus #3077.

It took a while, but WMATA finally got back to the rider.

I got a call from someone in WMATA customer service this morning, telling me they'd started a proceeding against the driver in question.

The guy gave me the name and number of the person in charge of investigating the driver, and an email to send photos and video to. So at this point I'm satisfied with the response -- it sounds like they're actually taking this seriously, and I'd like to give them credit for that.

Friday night (11:15pm) fighting breaks out on Green Line at Fort Totten stop after a black girl grabs a cell phone from a white college student. The victim ends up being punched and beaten on the platform when she runs after the thief; a couple of the thief's friends pushed her down and beat her until she started bleeding around the mouth. The victims's friends (a mixed crowd of 8-10 Univ. of MD students) retaliate by not letting the train doors close as they try to get the cell phone back. Police (Metro & DC) finally arrive but fail to let the victim identify anyone and instead let the train close it doors and proceed on. this was actually the last train of the night running from Greenbelt to DC... Even though Metro police said they would stop the train at the next stop, it's unlikely the matter was investigated because they didn't bother to talk to any of the victims. WOW!!! What a night and a horrible first time visit for some young college students.

At the end the MTPD officer urges the cameraman to turn off the camera and says there are police waiting at the next station.

So let's pretend, and I stress pretend, Metro's customer satisfaction survey is 100 percent accurate and 80 percent of Metrorail riders are indeed satisfied with the service, and 84 percent are happy with bus service.

After seemingly constant fare hikes, a new board, a new GM, years of weekend and nighttime track work, escalator replacements, straight As on all their "vital signs" reports, tons of new hires, new buses, Metroforward, Momentum, Rush+, pats on the back from every "stakeholder," and hundreds of millions spent "rebuilding the system" to "improve safety and reliability," it's about time the hard work and "investment" started paying off with higher numbers of satisfied riders, right?

Well...

Back in 2008, less than a year before the fatal Red Line crash, 85 percent of Metrorail riders and 78 percent of Metrobus riders were satisfied with Metro service.

Back in 2007, 87 percent of Metrorail riders and 81 percent of Metrobus riders were satisfied with Metro service.

I could not find releases about earlier surveys, but in the two above, Metro said the numbers "remain consistent" from 2004.

Weird thing is that in 2003, when I'm pretty sure everyone thought Metro was at least little better than it is now (it certainly was cheaper), the satisfaction with Metrorail was 72 percent and 76 percent for Metrobus. Metro used what appears to be a different system of surveying in 2003.

I suppose some of this year's lower numbers could be explained by the constant track work over the weekends, but perhaps, if Metro were honest and forthcoming with riders and did a better job at managing expectations instead of rolling out self aggrandizing PR campaign after PR campaign, its relationship with its riders might be a little better. Instead, Metro continuously brags and boasts about how everything is just fine.

If you live on PR instead of real accomplishment, eventually, even the cooked numbers won't lie.

In recent board meetings, Metro GM Richard Sarles has boasted about how many new employees Metro has been hiring to help "rebuild the system."

But just what kind of people is Metro hiring, and are they helping or hurting?

The number of new employees and the loss of veteran employees over the past 18 months was a major concern in last week's FTA safety "audit."

In the Automatic Train Control (ATC) Department, which is responsible for crucial safety systems to prevent trains from colliding, two sources say they are very concerned for their safety and the safety of riders because of the low skill--and language--level of new employees.

"Some of these new guys have developed terrible working habits that would take an old timer years to have the nerve to pull off," said one source. "Metro is partly to blame for that. The influx of workers in ATC who walk around without the basic equipment needed to perform their jobs like keys to access rooms, radios and the lack of basic troubleshooting skills, have created a work environment that just isn't safe. So, for all the talk of safety and patting themselves on the back, it's all make believe."

Another source said the new hires have nothing to do. "They can't do anything because they don't know how," they said. "They're more in the way than anything else. It's just a matter of time until there's another incident."

On the rail operations side, the unskilled and inexperienced new hires have lead to delays and damaged equipment.

Particularly, the position of line supervisor has led to some embarrassing incidents, says one Metro source.

Line supervisors are in charge of the train operators and station managers. They are supposed work their way up the ranks from operator or station manager and over the course of that experience, they are supposed acquire the skills to troubleshoot train malfunctions at a higher level than an operator, for example. When a train breaks down, a line supervisor should be able to get it moving again so that "normal" service can begin.

Yet recently, Metro hired several supervisors with no experience at all. One was a baggage handler before coming to Metro, says a source.

One of these new hires was recently responsible for moving an out of service train out of the way so "normal" service could resume. They were told to move the train to Pentagon City, passing through Arlington Cemetery. At Arlington Cemetery, the radio system changes frequency, and train operators are suppose to change from "ops 2" to ops 3," said a source. "There's a big sign" reminding them to do that, said the source.

Here's what happened according to the source: This new hire did not change his radio frequency. So instead of going to Pentagon City, he went through Pentagon and then stopped. Because the supervisor didn't change the radio frequency, central control was unable to reach them to tell them to move. Because that area is a dead zone for cell phones, they were unable to reach them via a Metro-issued cell phone. The train kept sitting there, incommunicado. It was so long that Metro began single tracking around it, until one train stopped next to it and another employee got on the idled train and told the supervisor--finally--to move.

Another new hire, when taking a train to the yard failed to conduct a basic brake test, said a source. The result was that he barreled the train down the tracks with brakes engaged on one of the cars and was only made aware by a passing train operator who saw "smoke and flames" coming from the train.

Another one of these hires apparently failed to understand the basics of railroading and refused to move the train because he had no speed command readouts (a common occurrence at Metro) even though central control had told him it was OK to do so.

"They're wreaking havoc out there," said the source.

And what kind of punishment is meted out when something like this happens?

"Metro is afraid to deal with anyone one-on-one," said a source. "They'll send out a memo to 500 people saying anyone caught not answering their radio would be in trouble instead of going to that one person who did not answer their radio."

Another source agreed "wholeheartedly" with this and said it was demoralizing to a lot of Metro employees who are trying to do the right thing.

And how does the person in charge of line supervisors spend his time?

"One of their new things was to check the station managers to see if they're wearing white socks," said the source. "They're not part of the uniform. It's ridiculous. Your performance is related to how much paperwork you can generate."

These line supervisors command at least $80,000 in annual salary, the source said, and there are roughly 70 of them Metro-wide.

How are these people getting in?

All sources agree that Metro is having a hard time attracting skilled
workers and are largely having to select from the "bottom of the
barrel," according to one source. "The pay and the shift work make Metro
unattractive to someone with skills," they added.

Furthermore, all Metro sources interviewed for this post confirm that exams have been dumbed down to the point of being meaningless.

For positions that still have to take exams, a Metro source said very specific study guides are handed out. The study guides break down the number of questions per topics--Breda brakes--for example and will cite the relevant passages in instruction manuals to read for the exam.

"They just memorize, but it's useless for what they're actually expected to do on the job," said a source. "There's no thinking involved. There's no applied knowledge."

"They did away with testing the new hires, to the point that we are now teaching some of them the basics of electricity and electronics at best, and English at worst," said a source in ATC. "We are becoming a jobs program."

Even the training is being reduced.

One Metro source said that the training period for train operators used to be 18 weeks, it was later trimmed to 16 then trimmed again, and now, the source said, the training is moving to just six weeks.

All sources scoffed at the FTA findings about the training for new employees and the audit as a whole.

"A real, balls to the wall investigation, would see me coming into work and have my supervisor hand us a phone number or email for us to contact the investigating agents with any concerns," said one veteran employee. "That has never happened since I've been at Metro."

Another source said whenever the FTA and NTSB come around, "they're at the mercy of Metro's management, and they're not getting a true feel for how things really are for most of us."

We need YOU!

Our best posts are from you!

Over 700,000 of you take Metro every day. Whether it's a simple tweet from the front lines, a funny photo or story or something more substantial, tell us. Got an idea of something we should do? Let us know. More than half of this blog has been written by riders just like you.